Sunday, March 12, 2017

It's hard to overestimate the stupidity of the Alt-White, which frequently confuses German supremacism for trans-white nationalism and lionizes a successful rhetorician who failed to learn from either his early successes or his subsequent failures, and in doing so managed to transform Germany from a likely global superpower into a conquered US satrapy for 70 years and counting.

The list of things that Hitler did wrong is considerably longer than the list of things he did right. I mean, successfully bluffing the French and British governments, and stabbing the Soviets in the back first, hardly makes up for a) launching a two-front war by b) invading Russia, then c) unnecessarily declaring war on the most powerful industrial nation on Earth. Hitler wasn't merely a complete failure, he was a guaranteed failure before the end of 1941.

I always find it amusing when people call me a Nazi. I have considerably more contempt for Nazis than the most sincere Nazi-hater. Those who hate the Nazis fear them and consider them to be evil and scary villains. I don't fear them and I consider them to be inept, ignorant losers. I'm not counter-signaling here; I don't counter-signal Communists or people with Down's Syndrome either.

And for those who try to claim that it's just rhetoric, yes, I am aware of its use in that capacity. The point is that the best and most effective rhetoric is rooted in truth, not ignorance and buffoonery.

176 Comments:

Yes, agree very much. After reading on the economic blunders, duplicate hierarchies, Adolf micromanaging, and general lack of efficiency, and common sense, I arrived to the conclusion that Germany had with the Nazis the most un-German government any German state had had in History.

It is simply rhetoric for some, to be sure. But as is always the case, the less intelligent latch onto it as a genuine argument. Look at the idiots here who see me correctly identify a gamma who is doing gamma things, then decide that "gamma" is a great disqualifying insult to be utilized in an indiscriminate fashion.

Vox, the stream was cut about 3/4 thru and i dont think the last 1/4 is avail on the replay. Saw 2nd half live, but when went to re-watch, it is cut off. V strange. It also got cut during the Live, tho it came back as a new stream for the end. V. strange....it has never happened before

hardly makes up for a) launching a two-front war by b) invading Russia, then c) unnecessarily declaring war on the most powerful industrial nation on Earth.

The U.S. was already essentially at war with Germany because of Lend-Lease... I wonder how the war would have gone if Germany had waited for the U.S. to declare war on her first. I'm almost certain that the U.S. would have eventually.

I have always interpreted it to refer specifically to his anti-semitic actions, as that is what we continually hear he was so wrong about. Of course, the same people who say this, also say that there were no gas chambers and the number dead was nowhere near 6 million. Most of those who died, according to this thinking, died for lack of nutrition in the camps as the regular Germans were also suffering from this by the end of the war.

I am sure there are some small number who take the phrase literally, but I would be surprised if this were the majority view of what you call the "Alt White".

It is the fatal flaw of the Alt-Right sans Christendom which teaches humility that they will overreach. The humble crusaders will defeat Islam and the left, not the "sons of Odin/Woton", confident in their own strength and the support of heaven.

Britain was stupid to go to war over Danzig (See Pat Buchanan's book). Hitler should have prevented Dunkirk.The two front war!? It's is supposed to be divide and conquer, not do the two front war.

The other problem is Hitler considered Slavs inferior so instead of creating an eastern European set of allies (not even Vichy!) he created a resistance.

Today, the left at best might be the French Resistance, but the latter was only effective when the foreign armies showed up, and because Vichy wasn't the best at governing.

Link with Japan? If Hitler went 180 the other way, and condemned the attack at Pearl Harbor, the world would be very different, but Europride is only exceeded by AsiaPride, and at the time "The land of the rising sun" had the most hubris - but succeeded in raping NanKing.

(New food item: Nanking eggs, which are fertilized apart from other culinary techniques)

I once hired a guy from Argentina only to fire him a few months later. His grandparents apparently emigrated there from Germany in the late '40s. I was hoping for efficient and cold-blooded machine. What I got instead was a whiney and incompetent dolt. Effing Nazis....

@15 I would never presume greater knowledge than Mr. Lind on any historical military matter, but it seems to me that, assuming the Germans believed what they said about the Jews, that they never would have trusted the Jews on the front lines.

Unless those dissidents had German guns to their backs like the Soviets did with their "traitors" and criminals, I don't think it would've been wise to put people who despise your regime on the front lines: they'd probably just defect.

"Hitler did nothing wrong" is pure trolling at the cognitively impaired level. Or at the zero social skill level. Like a socially inept, not too bright midschooler passing gas in the classroom, then insisting someone else did it. That can make girls cry, too, probably.

In the battle of France the Germans and allies had nearly equal forces. Of course the morale of the French was rock bottom and they lacked the huge territory of the Russians to fall back on. So the logistics issue never came into play the way it did in Russia.

I always find it amusing when people call me a Nazi. I have considerably more contempt for Nazis than the most sincere Nazi-hater. Those who hate the Nazis fear them and consider them to be evil and scary villains. I don't fear them and I consider them to be inept, ignorant losers. I'm not counter-signaling here; I don't counter-signal Communists or people with Down's Syndrome either.

Indeed. I hate Hitler for how he got so many Native European men shot, women raped and kids hungry. Ironically, blackshirts love that part.

@15 Where did Lind say this? I would be interested in reading further since I was under the impression the Final Solution was the result of prior failures to deal with the Jews. I thought Hitler first tried to persuade them to join their brethren in Israel, then saw the remaining when the war started as potential threats, sources of funding, labor, etc.

After watching 1-1/2 seasons of Nazi Mega Weapons on Netflix streaming, I have come to the conclusion that Germany's worst enemy was Hitler and his outsized ego. I did not realize the nazis were responsible for so many weapons that our modern day military relies on now.

Hitler made so many stupid decisions during that war. I find it hard to believe that the Generals put up with him for so long.

Am I correct VD in assuming you are referring to the average nazi when you call them inept and ignorant losers? Or are you considering the SS part of the inept loser crowd.

@10 Me too. Last night pb froze at 18 min. in and tonight pb at 10 min in. Could not get it to restart. I've learned to expect half the show from periscope if lucky. Maybe something with pale moon? Or, periscope.

Strangely though, on Breitbart someone made the exact statement. Of course, I went in to defend the person (like an idiot) without thinking, because the discussion turned towards the Jews. Probably wasn't the right decision. I wonder what is the appropriate response when there's a discussion of the entire anti-Semite/JQ issue?

I know Hitler was megalomaniacal and the Nazis did a great deal of damage to Eastern Europe.

Yeah, declaring war on the US wasn't a smart move, regardless of the undeclared naval war that the US had been carrying on against Germany for years prior.

With regard to the USSR, it's interesting to note that Stalin had dismantled almost all of the border minefields and other physical barriers, had no defense in depth, and had a heck of a lot of troops, supplies, ammunition, etc., stacked up near the border, but not really deployed. That's one of the reasons the German encirclements were so successful early on. I wonder why he did that?

There is an argument to be made that Germans lost the war no later than December 5 of 1941. He had to defeat Russia before the US got into the war, and the failure of the offensive is Russia on the 5th meant that was not going to happen.

If the soviet historians are right though, had Hitler not attacked Russian in June, by the end of the summer the soviet would have attacked Hitler. If that is so, then Hitler lost the war when he failed to get Britain to the bargaining table in the late summer of 1940, which is what most folks see as the peak "Nazi" period. Kind of makes you think.

Any way you look at it, going to war in 1939 shows that Germany was way to weak to go to war. They should have known it after WWI. Britain and France had access to the resources of the world, Germany and the central powers were restricted to a small patch of Europe, not a recipe for long term war success.

In any case one can say this, on the highest level of leadership, the Germans were betrayed by their elite. 75 years later they are still dealing with the result of that ignominious period. What we should be focusing on is the fact our current elites (outside of team Trump) are similar dunces, not NAZIs but as disastrous as they were to the well being of the nation.

Any discussions of Hitler and his government in terms of policies: economic, educational, environmental, etc, have been declared off limits by (((those))) who claim ownership of the subject. So we are not even allowed to evaluate, for example, the economic policies to see what worked, what didn't work and why. It is all verboten. Many in the Alt Right are starting to tell them that (((they))) no longer get to decide what topics are off limits for discussion.

I don't see why you care what catchphrases internet Nazis spout on anonymous imageboards.

I guess it's because the election is over so the time is ripe to try to educate the ignorant extremists at the cost of a little morale. Good job son, we got Trump elected, now about this Nazi shit you've been spewing... *takes kid out to woodshed*

It could be that this Darkstream angered a lot of pagans and neo-Nazis. 105K subs Thuleanperspective was even more mentally unstable than usual.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHH0bc4fyq8

As a fellow Norwegian, I actually agree with most of what he says regarding traditionalism, hard-left Norwegian insanity, etc. However whenever he starts to talk about Christianity, he sounds like an angry little teenager, hating mum, the Church and the whole unfair world. Not a pretty sight.

@37 " I wonder what is the appropriate response when there's a discussion of the entire anti-Semite/JQ issue?"

Taking a page from Thucydides' Diodotus: Putting aside sentimentality or questions of justice, the focus should be on what best serves one's interest, if whether giving absolutely no quarter is worth the zealotry you'll be burdened with later on.

Of course, via his proposal, Athens ended up taxing the hell out of the Mytilenaeans as payback for their rebelling against them, which like Versailles only delayed what would be the same result if they'd just indiscriminately killed the lot of them at the beginning.

@38 "I wonder why he did that?"

Can't speak for the first one, but the rest seem to be covered pretty well by both the generals' purge and the general excellency of Soviet managing. I'm sure there's more.

People like Hitler because he was wise to the JQ and valued preserving race and culture. Nazi crimes are used to discredit any white person or group for advocating for their own countries or interests, so some alt-white/righters stridently try to defend Hitler. Making it a central point of your argument for saving the West is a misstep, however.

White nationalists can take the positive aspects of NatSoc (racial nationalism, protecting the environment, opposing degeneracy) and leave behind the Imperium and fratricide. Brother wars between european peoples are unacceptable.

No one actually believes that "Hitler did nothing wrong". It's a meme to piss of leftys, as well as a conversation starter to bring up how compared to Stalin and the 86% jewish Bolsheviks who killed 10s of millions of Christians, what Hitler did was basically self defense.

@44 "So we are not even allowed to evaluate, for example, the economic policies to see what worked, what didn't work and why. It is all verboten."

Especially on the subject of their stated reasons for invading Poland. Beyond "die Pole grosse Wannsin" of the Polish brass' hubris in claiming (IIRC) that they could take Germany in 3 days' time (and the former is apparently what the average Wehrmacht troop entering Poland had on his mind for justification):

The main reason seems to have been Germany's conviction that Poland was a European Afghanistan, ripe for Soviet conquest due to cultural, agricultural, and economic conditions. There were several high profile and apparently in-depth socioeconomic studies done around the 1930's by German academics on this question: Polish agricultural conditions; migration from rural to city because of their failing farm model; racial demographics; employment; birthrates and family/work habits; literacy; median income; and so on.

And given that the most intentional destabilization done during the Wiemar Republic - street fighting and riots - were apparently engineered by Reds, it's not hard to imagine their fear of a Pole-to-Prole factory on their border. It I think also explains the Nazi obsession with Jewish Bolshevism in Russia - the Wiemar street fighting and then Poland were (as they saw it, and might well have been) the first engineered existential threats on that front, and it wouldn't stop until the seeming head of the snake was cut off.

Susan wrote:After watching 1-1/2 seasons of Nazi Mega Weapons on Netflix streaming, I have come to the conclusion that Germany's worst enemy was Hitler and his outsized ego.

Ok, some were stupid, ineffectual, inefficient, lumbering failures. But the idea of putting a battleship turret on a super-tank... yes, it was stupid, ineffectual, inefficient, and a total waste of resources. But it was a battleship turret on a tank!!!

[Thinking engaged.] The US has four Iowa-class battleships, mothballed. That's 12 turrets each with three 16-inch guns. So, I'm thinking 12 YUUUUUUUGE tanks. Crew of 70 for the guns, another 8 for the vehicle itself, plus diversity officer, 6-lawyer JAG team, 10 staff officers for paperwork, 9 environment compliance statements for each shell, and a cook for morale.

Couldn't be more wasteful that the F35 "easy Sukhoi target practice" fighter or the F22 "unexplained crashes" fighter-bomber.

The U.S. was already essentially at war with Germany because of Lend-Lease... I wonder how the war would have gone if Germany had waited for the U.S. to declare war on her first. I'm almost certain that the U.S. would have eventually.

Maybe. Roosevelt certainly wanted to, but he would already have done it if he had the political support. He had US destroyers attacking German submarines in an effort to provoke a political crisis he could use, but assuming it happened at all it may have taken years if the Germans were careful.

Hitler got snookered by the Japanese. They managed to extract a promise from the Germans to support them if they went to war, and were very careful not to say who they had in mind as an enemy. The Germans push the Japanese to attack Vladivostok, which will be decisive, since Stalin loses his safe manufacturing areas and the Russians will be forced to defend themselves on two fronts on opposite sides of a very large country when they're barely hanging on as it is.

When Japan attacks the US they lead the Germans on like that cock-teaser you never quite get into the sack, implying they'll attack Vladivostok Real Soon Now without ever actually promising to do so. Hitler knows they'll never attack if he doesn't keep his promise to declare war on their new enemy, but he figures public opinion in the US will force Roosevelt to concentrate on the Pacific. Even with the US as an official enemy it's going to be years before it matters in Europe, assuming they win, while a nontrivial Japanese attack in the East will be an immediate deathblow to the Soviets. In the meantime the blockade of the UK will become much more effective if German planes and submarines can make unrestricted attacks on US shipping and US material support for the UK will drop off as it gears up to take on Japan.

At this point in the war, the Germans expect a negotiated peace with the UK literally any day. Well, they thought that last year, too, but surely the UK can't hold out much longer. It's not like they have any chance of getting back into Europe, after all, and the UK hasn't really lost any territory to the Germans. When the UK bows out the US won't have a staging area from which to attack Germany, and will have to stage in Russia. The people of the US have a soft spot for the Brits, but they don't like the communists much, so it's going to be difficult for Roosevelt to motivate them.

And remember, this is December 1941. The war in the East, while more costly than expected, is still looking like a fait accompli. When Russian resistance collapses Germany doesn't need Japan any more and can negotiate an "aw, just kiddin'" peace with the US before enough US servicemen die to harden US support for a war against Germany.

In hindsight, since it didn't play out like the Germans expected, it doesn't look like a smart move. But at the time, given what the Germans knew and what they expected from the Japanese government, from the war in the East, and from the American people, it made a lot of sense.

Roosevelt must have really turned the anti-German propaganda up to eleven to get public support for a focus on Germany.

I've always found it darkly humorous that people who claim to care so much about whites and white Western civilization applaud a man who started a war that killed 50+ million whites, largely wrecked numerous white European countries, and caused the long-term, possibly permanent decline of white Western civilization.

One could reasonably make an argument that Hitler did more to kill whites and white Western civilization than anyone else in history.

Liking him appears to be the sentiment of someone that violently hates whites and Western civilization, no?

But for some folks, all of that is more than made up for by killing a far smaller number of Jews. You can think of it as the same reason many black Africans like a Mugabe. Sure he ruined Rhodesia and killed hundreds of thousands of blacks, but goddamn it, he killed a far smaller number of whites and drove them out of the country so he is a hero!

Also, the Trump = Hitler association created by the ZOG media is actually rehabilitating Hitler's reputation thanks to the God Emperor's impending successes. Before we die he's going to be seen as a visionary who tried and failed to save the West.

One of the saddest, sorriest cases I've ever seen is Harold Covington. The man can write---and write well---but he squandered his talent in worship of Hitler. Even when he's writing neo-Nazi stuff, though, he's far better than the average; his The Brigade is a million times better than The Turner Diaries.

How anybody could believe that Naziism would ever be able to get a following in places like Poland and Russia, though, escapes me.

Bob Loblaw wrote:Roosevelt must have really turned the anti-German propaganda up to eleven to get public support for a focus on Germany.

Well FDR and all the New Dealers were veteran Wilsonites. The anti-German propaganda crusade coming out of the Wilson Administration during the WWI period was incredible. Everybody cites Goebbels as the father of modern propaganda ministries, but really it was George Creel, whom Wilson tapped to lead the Committee on Public Information (CPI) which blanketed the USA with pamphlets, newspaper articles, Hollywood films, radio broadcasts -- all of it depicting Germans as subhuman Hun monsters and the Kaiser in league with the devil.

@59 Rob LoblawThe Germans push the Japanese to attack Vladivostok, which will be decisive, since Stalin loses his safe manufacturing areas

What? This has zero connection to the reality of 1941.Dude, just for a start, look at a map of the USSR. See where Vladivostok is, and then locate the Donbass & the Urals. If you know the history, you know what I'm pointing to.

The Germans push the Japanese to attack Vladivostok, which will be decisive, since Stalin loses his safe manufacturing areas

What? This has zero connection to the reality of 1941.

Dude, just for a start, look at a map of the USSR. See where Vladivostok is, and then locate the Donbass & the Urals. If you know the history, you know what I'm pointing to.

This isn't even alternate history. It's more like LARPing.

Still, if the Japanese had attacked the Soviets at all, Stalin couldn't have shifted the Siberian divisions to the defense of Moscow. With them tied down in the east, it's conceivable that the Germans could have taken the city, even in the winter. They reached the outskirts despite everything, after all.

And the seizure of Moscow would have been quite decisive, IMO. This wasn't 1812 when one place is pretty much like another. Moscow was THE railroad hub for the USSR west of the Urals. If Moscow fell, no reinforcements, fuel, ammunition, or food would have reached the Soviet forces still in European Russia. It would have been an utter disaster for the Red Army, worse than they actually suffered, and might have damaged Stalin enough politically to bring about his assassination and replacement. And subsequent peace negotiations with the Germans.

The Japanese were a pure liability to the Germans, with no redeeming features whatsoever. They accelerated the U.S. entry into the war, at a minimum, and did zero to assist their nominal allies, the Germans.

This is another important aspect of history, that is not widely known:

Vietnam why did we go?

By Avro Manhattan

CHAPTER 3

Fatimaization of the West

'' The Virgin's messages had been to induce the Pope to bring about "the consecration of the World to her Immaculate Heart," to be followed by "the consecration of Russia." "Russia will be converted," she foretold. "The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me." But, she warned, should this not be accomplished, "her (Russia's) errors will spread throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions . . . different nations will be destroyed . . ." In the end however, the Virgin promised by way of consolation, that the Catholic Church would triumph, after which "the Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me. Thereupon she (Russia) shall be converted and a period of peace will be granted to the world."

These quotations are from the authenticated messages of the Virgin Mary herself, as related to one of the children and fully accepted by the Catholic Church as a genuine revelation by the "Mother of God."[2]

Within a few years the cult of Fatima had grown to great proportions. The number of pilgrims multiplied from sixty on June 13, 1917 to 60,000 in October of that same year. From 144,000 in 1923, to 588,000 in 1928. The total for six years: two millions.[3]

The Vatican took the promises seriously. Msgr. Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII, then the gray eminence behind Pope Pius XI, sponsored a policy supporting Fascism in Italy and then the Nazis in Germany, to help the prophecy come true. In fact he became the chief instrument in helping Hitler to get into power. This he did by urging the German Catholic Party to vote for Hitler at the last German general election in 1933.[4] The basic idea was a simple one. Fascism and Nazism, besides smashing the Communists in Europe, ultimately would smash Communist Russia. Concurrently, however, Europe had also been Fatimaized. The cult of Fatima, with emphasis on the Virgin's promise of Russia's conversion, had been given immense prominence by the Vatican. In 1938, a papal nuncio was sent to Fatima, and almost half a million pilgrims were told that the Virgin had confided three great secrets to the children. Thereupon, in June of that year, the only surviving child—advised by her confessor, always in touch with the hierarchy and hence with the Vatican—revealed the contents of two of the three great secrets:

The first was a vision of Hell (something well known to the modern world). The second was more to the point: a reiteration that Soviet Russia would be converted to the Catholic Church. The third was sealed in an envelope and put in custody of the ecclesiastical authority not to be revealed until 1960.

The dramatic reiteration of the revelation of the second secret about Soviet Russia immediately assumed a tremendous religious and political significance. The timing of the "disclosure" could not have been better chosen. The Fascist dictatorships were talking the same language: the annihilation of Soviet Russia.

The following year, 1939, the Second World War broke out. In 1940, France was defeated. The whole of Europe had become Fascist. In 1941, Hitler invaded Russia. The Virgin's prophecy at long last was about to be fulfilled. At the Vatican there was rejoicing, since by now Pacelli had become Pope under the name of Pius XII (1939).

Pius XII encouraged Catholics to volunteer for the Russian front. Catholics—most of them devotees of the Virgin of Fatima —joined the Nazi armies, from Italy, France, Ireland, Belgium, Holland, Latin America, the U.S. and Portugal. Spain sent a Catholic Blue Division. '' - http://www.reformation.org/chapter3.html

I've always found it darkly humorous that people who claim to care so much about whites and white Western civilization applaud a man who started a war that killed 50+ million whites, largely wrecked numerous white European countries, and caused the long-term, possibly permanent decline of white Western civilization.

There's a reason I call them Alt-Gamma.

But for some folks, all of that is more than made up for by killing a far smaller number of Jews.

From what I understand, the Nazis rejected Christianity and attempted to put Germans up as a substitute Chosen People. Which worked out real well...

From what I understand, the Nazis rejected Christianity and attempted to put Germans up as a substitute Chosen People. Which worked out real well...

Not only that, but Hitler lamented that "weak, flabby Christianity" was the national religion of Germany and wished it had been something more warlike instead, like Shintoism or the "Mohamaddean faith", the latter of which he was a big admirer.

Hitler was a great American hero...if it wasn't for him constantly meddling in his General's plans they might have actually won the war. Think of how many Army Air Corp pilots he saved by personally gutting the ME-262 program into too little/too late.

Yeah! Then take two and park them in NYC, on First Avenue, one on the E42nd intersection and one on E46th intersection. For, shall we say, making a point. Like a parade, only in place. There's a bit of a park there, so they needn't block the road. :-)

lowercaseb wrote:Hitler was a great American hero...if it wasn't for him constantly meddling in his General's plans they might have actually won the war. Think of how many Army Air Corp pilots he saved by personally gutting the ME-262 program into too little/too late.

About mid-war, the British considered assassinating Hitler, but decided not to because he was too valuable to them. I'm not kidding -- that was their reasoning at the time, that he was fouling up the German military to the point where he was more useful to the Allies alive.

My own extensive reading suggests this was probably quite accurate. I'm just some amateur historian, but I'd give the Germans about a 50% chance of winning without Hitler's interference, possibly higher.

Three things that I will give the Nazis, though:

1. The early fighting leagues (Freikorps, Stahlhelm, eventually the SA) did prevent the communists from taking over Germany, which would have led to an even worse disaster than we've got now.

2. They actually worked out a society that managed to have positive White population growth in the modern era. That's no mean feat.

3. They were correct, IMO, in their overall analysis of the JQ, long before most other people managed to see the risk.

These "Hitler would have won the war if..." hypotheticals always strike me as silly. It's completely ignoring who he was or how he came to power.

You know how Hitler could have definitely won the war? If he had spared his German Jewish scientists and also used the Jewish scientists in the territories he conquered.

After all, it was almost exclusively American Jewish scientists and a few recent European Jewish immigrants that were responsible for the Manhattan Project and the US getting the atom bomb a few months before Japan, which was feverishly working on it, too.

Germany was working towards it as well, and likely would have gotten there before the US (Germany started much earlier) had they retained all those Jewish scientists that either fled or were killed.

But of course, that was antithetical to the whole Nazi ideology to begin with. In the same way that a lot of these superior battle strategies were antithetical to Hitler's personality, how he came to power, how he chose the German elite, etc.

Had he been a smarter, more careful, and prudent leader he might not have come to power at all, or would have had a different ideology.

The U.S. was already essentially at war with Germany because of Lend-Lease... I wonder how the war would have gone if Germany had waited for the U.S. to declare war on her first. I'm almost certain that the U.S. would have eventually.

This isn't true in any practical sense. Germany should have never invaded the Low Countries and France, nor bombed Great Britain. There was nothing in it for them, and their opponents in the West had no appetite for invading Germany. It's was called the 'Phony War' for a reason. Hitler broke the 'Phony War' unspoken truce, not France.

The Nazis didn't reject Christianity. They actively put influence agents in the German Protestant Churches and infected all of the main congregations. Sound familiar?

https://infogalactic.com/info/Confessing_Church

There were attempts at a response, and most everyone involved in the response paid dearly. Then the Confessing Church showed what we would now consider Churchianity: confessing guilt because they were in the area and something bad happened.

Kyle Searle wrote:The U.S. was already essentially at war with Germany because of Lend-Lease... I wonder how the war would have gone if Germany had waited for the U.S. to declare war on her first. I'm almost certain that the U.S. would have eventually.

This isn't true in any practical sense. Germany should have never invaded the Low Countries and France, nor bombed Great Britain. There was nothing in it for them, and their opponents in the West had no appetite for invading Germany. It's was called the 'Phony War' for a reason. Hitler broke the 'Phony War' unspoken truce, not France.

The France thing was indeed utterly pointless. Regardless of what thinks of the USSR (and I do believe they were a direct threat to Europe in general and Germany in particular), there was no reason to attack France other than as "revenge" for WW1.

The rapid defeat of the French when the Germans invaded shows that they were absolutely no threat to the Germans even had they decided to attack into Germany. The same goes for the British Expeditionary Force. In fact, at that point, the British had so few weapons in England that a donation of thousands of civilian rifles from American citizens was an important part of initially arming the home defense forces.

The Germans could have ignored the west almost totally, other than positioning a few divisions on the border to deter raids and/or serve as a "tripwire," and would have been much better off for it.

Actually, I'd have to say that BOTH of Hitler's allies were useless. Both the Japanese and the Italians caused immense problems and contributed nothing positive to the German effort.

@83 SteelpalmJewish immigrants that were responsible for the Manhattan Project and the US getting the atom bomb a few months before Japan, which was feverishly working on it, too.

What? I'm not drinking but maybe I should start now.

Is this another example of the Mandela effect? Or the obvious failures of modern education? If you had any idea how big Manhattan was, how many people were involved in it, the continent-wide resource commitment required, you would not write such a ridiculous sentence.

Look, Fascism is nothing more than a legitimate defense against Bolshevism. Sometimes the program creates poor domestic and foreign policy decisions, but the stance against the Bolshevik does not change. You can adopt whatever flavors of Hitler, Franco or Mussolini that combine to create and effective antidote to Bolshevism, whether of the Russian variety or the American variety.

@84 It's also important to remember that in 1938 it had only been 20 years since the end of WW1. The last time anyone had tried to invade Germany from the West, it cost somewhere in the range of 8 million casualties. Repeating that event wasn't going to be high on anyone's priority list.

Is this another example of the Mandela effect? Or the obvious failures of modern education? If you had any idea how big Manhattan was, how many people were involved in it, the continent-wide resource commitment required, you would not write such a ridiculous sentence.

Your cloying, whining rhetoric of the "I can't even!" variety aside, the Manhattan Project consisted of almost exclusively Jewish scientists and was headed by a Jewish scientist.

I think more than anything else, it's a form of virtue-signalling.The virtue, specifically, is hatred for one of the lies of the age."Hitler was so terrible that whites shouldn't have an identity" is a common lie, and one that is very rhetorically effective on many even though it's completely stupid.

Most people aren't capable of coming up with a dialectically accurate response that is still rhetorically effective, so they learn to keep their mouths shut even if they know the truth.To such people, a response that is basically an extreme version of "Fuck you" is encouraging.

So within our communities, "Hitler did nothing wrong" and other such extreme rhetoric is a morale-boosting meme, as it is essentially mocking the lies that, for many of us, once held us back, and for all of us, are a good indicator that somebody is an enemy who hates us. It's also a morale-damaging meme when used on the enemy.

Of course, edgy jokes attract genuine edge and repulse some people, so there's a danger there. However, we haven't yet hit a recruitment plateau. We have neither data nor any kind of reasoned argument for estimating how much influence we would have if we eschewed such things. For all I know we're blinded by the fact that, obviously, everybody who joined us so far is at least willing to put up with the edge.

The central tenet of Holocaustianity is that the Thing Hitler Did Wrong was gassing the kikes.

"Hitler did nothing wrong" repudiates this doctrine in a manner as hyperbolic as "6 million". Its kernel of truth is that the parasitic Jews really were at war with the noble Christian white German Volk, and thus putting those who wouldn't leave in internment camps was entirely justified.

"Hitler did nothing wrong" is to Jews what "Dicks out for Harambe" is to Negroes. It's just that no one takes the latter seriously. Which is ridiculous, because there is more evidence for the humanity of gorillas than the inerrancy of Hitler.

@1. You may have tried your best, Troll Adolf, but it was not anywhere near good enough. You were so incompetent that the Allies decided assassination would prolong the war.

@6 Zer udermenchen du Alt-Reich... what a lovely phrase.

General point missed by Septics: Britain and its empire had, in 1939, sufficient materiel to go it alone. They were more mechanized that the Krauts. they had better supply lines, already secure and conquered.

They had better boffins. (Note that the Austrian Jews went to the USA).

And they held it. alone, for 2 years.

Hitler needed Japan to get to Aussie and Canada to ensure Britain starved. When the USA entered the war, he was toast.

Besides, he broke rule two. Never wake the Russian Bear. At least he did not get into a land war in Asia.

Likely a waste of time to respond to you Cletus, especially since you were last embarrassed here by Tom Kratman, but the heads of the Soviet atomic project were the nuclear physicist Andrei Sakharov and Igor Kurchatov. Both were white (Slavic) Russians, although Sakharov had a bit of Greek blood.

And yes, the Soviets benefited from espionage into both the American and German nuclear programs before them. However, espionage by a totalitarian government is always going to be superior by one from a democratic republic.

Same reason why China is so successful at stealing American military secrets today as well as hacking major companies.

Jose wrote:Yeah! Then take two and park them in NYC, on First Avenue, one on the E42nd intersection and one on E46th intersection. For, shall we say, making a point. Like a parade, only in place. There's a bit of a park there, so they needn't block the road. :-)

Hitler had some incredibly people in his cabinet that created the German miracle. And Hitler screwed it.

People like this one were the ones that did things right:

Hjalmar Schachthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hjalmar_Schacht

Schacht played a key role in implementing the policies attributed to Hitler.[2]

While Schacht was for a time feted for his role in the German "economic miracle," he opposed Hitler's policy of German re-armament insofar as it violated the Treaty of Versailles and (in his view) disrupted the German economy. His views in this regard led Schacht to clash with Hitler and most notably with Goering. He was dismissed as President of the Reichsbank in January 1939. He remained as a minister without portfolio, and received the same salary, until he was fully dismissed from the government in January 1943. [3] After the war, he was tried at Nuremberg but acquitted.

It's always bullshit out of ((( you ))).It was ((( guess who ))) that handed that A-bomb info over to the Russians, not some anglo, you dumb kike.That was the point, and as per usual, you didn't get it.

hitlers mistake was in thinking the slav was the enemy, when in fact that jew was the source of the whole worlds misery.

If hitler was smart, he would have done this..1 start all out holocaust in 412. invade russia like invade france, as friends to liberate from bolshevism.3.establish protectorates over russia area4. have german males mate relentlessly with cute russian peasant girls.5 turn russia german in 40 years ( 2 generations) with minimal fighting and lots of humpies.

this is how allah willed it, and hitler was punished for ignoring allar and his prophett (pbuh)

"The last time anyone had tried to invade Germany from the West, it cost somewhere in the range of 8 million casualties."

Eh. Not so much. Most of the French and British Empire casualties were from trying to evict the Germans from France and Belgium. IIRC, the Allies didn't enter Germany until after the Armistice. The Germans were the aggressors that time, too.

No one "handed the A-bomb info over to the Russians" nor could such a thing even happen outside of idiot Hollywood movies, you dumb fucking redneck. If you knew a shred of physics or about how the nuclear programs were set up you would realize how monumentally retarded that is, the equivalent of surviving a nuclear explosion by hiding in a refrigerator.

Being an uneducated Mississippi yokel Cletus, you are also unaware that the Soviet Union, with or without its Jews, had the best physicists in the entire world back then.

And yes, the Manhattan Project was staffed and run almost entirely by Jews, and allowed the US to defeat Japan and avoid getting nuked by them first.

Cry and piss your swastika panties some more about it.

(I'm not even getting into the fact that Edward Teller, a Hungarian Jew, created the neutron bomb, a major element in the US winning the Cold War, as Soviet military orthodoxy was all about creating more tanks, more tanks, and yet more tanks.)

User wrote:Also, the Trump = Hitler association created by the ZOG media is actually rehabilitating Hitler's reputation thanks to the God Emperor's impending successes. Before we die he's going to be seen as a visionary who tried and failed to save the West.

Two points: a) The US didn't win. The USSR withdrew. There's a difference. b) The USSR withdrew due to radical Islam. By 1991 there was a horrific civil war between Azerbaijan and Armenia and another one in the 'Stans, and it was obvious that the project failed and needs to be scrapped.

The Stormfag is hurt by reality, can only respond with rhetorical shrieks of "Jewish lies! Jewish lies!", quelle surprise.

@108

In terms of the Jews. Hitler did nothing wrong in terms of the Jews. All actions Hitler took to defend the German people from Jew predation was justified.

I'm always curious about consistency here; do you also believe the black mobs in South Africa and Rhodesia/Zimbabwe lynching and torturing white families to death, including women and children, gang-raping white women, and forcing whites to flee the country by the millions "did nothing wrong"? And were/are simply recovering their land from the predatory, alien white minority that conquered them?!

SteelPalm wrote:I'm always curious about consistency here; do you also believe the black mobs in South Africa and Rhodesia/Zimbabwe lynching and torturing white families to death, including women and children, gang-raping white women, and forcing whites to flee the country by the millions "did nothing wrong"? And were/are simply recovering their land from the predatory, alien white minority that conquered them?!

Wow, no. Obviously not. At the same time, I have some sympathy for Germans needing wheelbarrows for the money to buy the food for their crying babies; I can see why they would do whatever it took.

With regard to the USSR, it's interesting to note that Stalin had dismantled almost all of the border minefields and other physical barriers, had no defense in depth, and had a heck of a lot of troops, supplies, ammunition, etc., stacked up near the border, but not really deployed. That's one of the reasons the German encirclements were so successful early on. I wonder why he did that?

Soviet military doctrine at the time was "with minimal casualties on enemy territory". Soviet leadership really did not expect a defensive war. (As usual they ended up making a gigantic mess of everything in the end.)

At the same time they didn't believe that Germany would seriously consider conquering the USSR, they viewed Japan as the more credible threat for a long time.

A few HDNW people mean it literally. But I think for the overwhelming majority of kekists, HDNW is a symbolic statement. Much as worshipping Trump's face photoshopped onto a Warhammer 40K God-Emperor isn't meant literally, and much as everybody also realizes that Trump (though we love him) has made many mistakes, it makes intuitive sense to declare Trump the flawless W40K God-Emperor of Mankind. Because that over-the-topness is a concise and funny way to say "I reject the lies I've been taught".

"Hitler Did Nothing Wrong" is the go-to phrase Pewdiepie just spoke during his last video, because it's a common denominator that everybody can immediately understand. It's not that Pewds literally believes HDNW, anymore than the TRS guys literally intend to make literal lampshades. HDNW is funny. Everybody gets that it's a frogwhistle; an endearing act of resistance against an overbearing foe.

Had he stayed on defense after the fall of France Nazi Germany could've probably held Hitler's gains for a very long time. As you pointed out in tonight's Darkstream, offense requires a 3:1 advantage. The Allies eventually had that but would they have paid the high casualty cost to invade a now non expansionist Germany? As someone above pointed out, the trench slaughter was still in recent memory.

As I understand it, Hitler justified his attack on Russia, whom he vastly underestimated in strength, as eliminating England's only hope and thus causing them to accept the 1940 map. He would've attacked Russia at some point, the Lebensraum thing, but the rushed timing of it was a catastrophic error.

People tend to forget that physics was considered to be a field similar to natural philosophy before the atom bomb. Chemistry and engineering were far more profound fields, mostly because they created far more tangible results than physics.

The American Chemistry Society is still the larger organization by a long shot, and advances in material chemistry are still what mostly drive the economy. No offense intended to physics. It is what it is.

Hitler can be evaluated by his errors which resulted in the Germany's destruction. Among these errors is waging war on two emergent superpowers and the British Commonwealth. However, I am of the belief that the punishing conditions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles was a factor in creating the conditions which led to Hitler.

Question: did America's entry into World War I tip the advantage in favor of the allies? If so then Hitler is partly the creation of America's decision to enter WWI, and entry into that conflict, from what I know had little to do with any American interests. WWI was a war with feudal origins and this had nothing to do with America.

If it is true that American involvement in WWI resulted in the Allies prevailing then it may also true that there would be no Treaty of Versailles without said involvement. It may also be true that Imperial Germany would have emerged as the European superpower. I believe that an Imperial Germany as the superpower is preferable to the Third Reich. Does this have any implication for the rise of the Soviets and the Cold War which followed WW2? Probably.

The Stormfag is hurt by reality, can only respond with rhetorical shrieks of "Jewish lies! Jewish lies!", quelle surprise.

Actually, the confirmed liar is you, SteelPalm. The head of the Manhattan Project was neither Jewish nor a scientist. The top two scientists on the project were not Jewish. And Jews were not only a tiny fraction of the 6,000 scientists who did work on the project, but most of those Jewish scientists were US-born.

I always considered "Hitler did nothing wrong" as the ultimate hypocrisy rhetorical response.Other than that it holds significant "shock value" due to how obviously wrong it is.I'm not sure Aristotle's definitions of arguments are sufficient to describe memetic warfare.

Hjalmar Schacht was responsible for manufacturing 12,000,000,000 Reichsmarks out of nearly thin air (actually 1,000,000 Reichsmarks) over a four year span from 1934 to 1938. He did this with MEFO bills, which were issued to finance the illegal rearmament of Germany. It was this sleight of hand that started the clock on Hitler's invasion of Poland. If he would have waited to initiate his planned war of conquest or abandoned this plan, the economic miracle would have crashed once the secret MEFO bill scheme caught up with reality. Keynesian economics works only for a while.

Beside's Vox's list Hitler made plenty of other mistakes almost all of which stem from the enormous blind spot most Germans developed in relation to their defeat in the First World War. Germany had been literally starved into submission by the total blockade imposed by the Allied powers but instead Germans were fed (and chose to believe) the myth that they had been stabbed in the back and made no provision for rectifying the underlying weakness of their position. This manifested itself in Hitler failing to pursue strategies that would

1. He failed to develop a mass-production economy before going to war against heavily industrialized enemies. To give an idea of the mismatch, Britain and its Commonwealth allies built 177,000 aircraft during the course of the war. All the Axis powers put together built about 230,000 of which Germany accounted for a little over 133,000. Canada alone built over 800,000 trucks during the course of the war, more than all the Axis powers combined. Soviet war production was roughly equivalent to that of the British Empire and Commonwealth, and both those powers were dwarfed by American manufacturing capacity. With it's lack of mass-production know-how Germany simply could not equip and supply its armies to the extent needed.

2. Compounding the above, despite conquering nearly all of continental Europe, Hitler failed to plan for the inevitable blockade imposed by the British Navy meaning that the Axis faced shortages in raw materials throughout the war. Then he compounded the problem by attacking Russia which had been supplying him with valuable raw materials literally up to the moment his troops crossed the border.

3. Hitler, to use an Obamanism, "believed his own bullshit" and developed strategy on that basis. He sought a negotiated peace with Britain in 1940 because he saw the British as fellow Germanic people and admired them, rather than decisively defeating them and forcing them to sue for peace. in 1941 he prioritized acquiring eastern Lebensraum over seizing Britain's oil assets in the Middle East. Again in 1941 he didn't fear war against the USA because as an impure "mongrel" nation its soldiers would be no match for the racially superior Germans. From 1941 onwards German brutality in conquered Ukraine and Belarus dissipated the goodwill many in those countries felt for being liberated from Soviet oppression. And Hitler's bullshit tranlated to Germans at large. Apparently, after the war, German nuclear scientists refused to believe that the allies had developed a functional atom bomb on the basis that if racially superior Germans were unable to build one, nobody else would be able to either.

Of course to one extent or another every leader screws up, but Hitler's mistakes far outclassed those of his enemies in that they went to Germany's basic inability to fight the war that Hitler wanted.

I personally like the phrase because it's our version of the motte and bailey arguments used by degenerate leftists. You can sit in the impregnable tower of positive things Hitler just happened to do right and perhaps have nothing to do with Naziism, then go out and fight the skirmish on the bailey of "Hitler did nothing wrong" which has the side effect of causing people to research him and become acquainted with nationalist ideas out of association. These, of course, include the right ideas to continue exploring alongside the trash. Like VD said, the people in the alt-lite have to go through that phase to become alt-West. The flip side is that alt-white have to go through THAT phase to become alt-West, too.

That's a good way of putting it. "Hitler did nothing wrong" is an aggressive opener that can put an opponent on the defensive, allowing the troll to take the role of the condescending explainer. "So? The Jews declared war first," and so on.

Like all effective rhetoric, it becomes more effective if you believe it literally, and somebody who has found it useful will be tempted to believe it on that ground alone. And although truth wins out in the long run, chutzpah makes for very effective rhetoric in the short term.

@137 Nicely put. People who fear that Russia might conquer Europe need only look at the GDP of the putative combatants to see something similar: Italy could, given the will, match Russia's war economy.

The Germans push the Japanese to attack Vladivostok, which will be decisive, since Stalin loses his safe manufacturing areas

What? This has zero connection to the reality of 1941.

Dude, just for a start, look at a map of the USSR. See where Vladivostok is, and then locate the Donbass & the Urals. If you know the history, you know what I'm pointing to.

This isn't even alternate history. It's more like LARPing.

Still, if the Japanese had attacked the Soviets at all, Stalin couldn't have shifted the Siberian divisions to the defense of Moscow. With them tied down in the east, it's conceivable that the Germans could have taken the city, even in the winter. They reached the outskirts despite everything, after all.

And the seizure of Moscow would have been quite decisive, IMO. This wasn't 1812 when one place is pretty much like another. Moscow was THE railroad hub for the USSR west of the Urals. If Moscow fell, no reinforcements, fuel, ammunition, or food would have reached the Soviet forces still in European Russia. It would have been an utter disaster for the Red Army, worse than they actually suffered, and might have damaged Stalin enough politically to bring about his assassination and replacement. And subsequent peace negotiations with the Germans.

The Japanese were a pure liability to the Germans, with no redeeming features whatsoever. They accelerated the U.S. entry into the war, at a minimum, and did zero to assist their nominal allies, the Germans.

Err, the Japanese did attack the Soviets in the summer of 1939 and got soundly beaten. This strongly influenced their decision to pursue the strategy they subsequently did by striking south against Western Imperial possessions.

Not having researched it in any depth, I do have sympathies with the view that the Jews may have exaggerated the Holocaust. To what degree I do not know. But with all of the kvetching and self absorption that seem to exhibit I have my suspicions. (Also, it never hurts hearing about how evil my ancestors were and the stories told about them, the South) Where do you fall (if you have looked into this at all) on what really happened?

Some obscure side-note on why Hitler believed he could take Russia: It seems he believed in the esoteric nonsense of Hanns Hörbiger called "Welteislehre". From that, he somehow believed that either the cold would have no effect or the winter would not be as harsh.

SciVo de Plorable wrote:Jose wrote:Yeah! Then take two and park them in NYC, on First Avenue, one on the E42nd intersection and one on E46th intersection. For, shall we say, making a point. Like a parade, only in place. There's a bit of a park there, so they needn't block the road. :-)

I know Hitler was megalomaniacal and the Nazis did a great deal of damage to Eastern Europe.

Nazis murdered more white people (primarily East Europeans) than Jews by a factor of two or more. They also set up a Musloid division in the Balkans, who likely killed more Christians than Jews. Not exactly ways to build white solidarity against Jewish parasitism, swindling and criminality.

When it came to dealing with the Jews, it would have been far less costly and efficient to pay their way to British Palestine or even neighboring French Syria after collapsing the Bankstein-marionette French regime in Paris and replacing with one governed by actual French.

Jews could have been given one-way tickets, no choice about leaving and allowed to take some property. It would have also created a strategic advantage insofar that it would have given the Bankstein-puppet regime in Britain a major headache in Palestine, thereby tying up needed military assets positioned in Egypt. Refraining from bombing Britain and allowing the Brit army to escape from their French entanglement would have likewise undermined popular support in Britain for the ruling Banksteins and their English Shabbas-goys.

Though a legend in his own mind, Hitler was no strategic genius, as has been noted already. If his ultimate game was to take on Stalin, propping up the anti-Stalin Polish regime would have been a far better move than invasion as he prepared to rollover the Bankstein-marionettes in France. Stalin, who had already taken control of the Marxist Empire from Trotsky and other Jews, could have been left for much later in the game.

Whether or not the "Alt-white" is stupid or not, your website has seen a steep fall in viewership while the Dailystormer, among other White Nationalist sites, continues to see almost exponential growth.

This is really the issue with you: you seem to be under the assumption that one person has more eyes, ears, and brains than the millions of people who comprise the movement.

I am not surprised that a non-white is critical of a white movement, which the alt-right, whether 'alt-west' or 'alt-white,' absolutely is.

Also, Germany's status as a pet nation to the (((USA))) is not surprising considering it was this nation with that genetic stock that were the first peoples to attempt to finally settle the jewish question, which is valid whether or not you like it.

"And for those who try to claim that it's just rhetoric, yes, I am aware of its use in that capacity. The point is that the best and most effective rhetoric is rooted in truth, not ignorance and buffoonery."

I am glad you said this, because I was going to bring it up. You are correct that the best form of rhetoric is based in truth. There are two point that I would make however.

(1) Hitler, despite what you think of him, was a champion, successful or not, for the self-determination of Germany and ultimately all of Europe. There is nothing wrong in shaking off parasites in the name of the nation and people.

As for that long list of things he did wrong, things dont go as expected in war, but you being a prolific leader of combat warriors already know that.

(2) You seem to want to evade knowing that this phrase is not so much about making an argument about whether or not Uncle Adolf was justified in interning all the jews.

It is more about triggering leftists, which I thought was a good thing, because the outrage of the left drives people to the right.

As mentioned by "Sam the Man", in the last 15 years a new theory is emerging, that is if Hitler would have attacked russia a few weeks later, most likely russia would attack europe instead and most likely roll over it up to the atlantic. Not saying they would able to keep it. They were preparing for attack, not defense, that's why hitler got so far inland and caused havoc. First brought to light by V.Suvorov books (Aquarium etc.). Makes sense from every angle (let european states exhaust themselves and then grab them etc.). Hey, after the horrible defeat they still managed to grab Berlin and eastern europe (although massively fueled by usa).In a strange way, that horrible person most likely saved western europe from russia.

That's about as dialectically accurate as Vox's statements about the Alt-White believing in Teutonic supremacy.

Alt-West is omni-nationalist, supporting ethnostates of all varieties. America for the Americans, Germany for the Germans, Mexico for the Mexicans, Philippines for the Filipinos, and so on.

Not a bad idea even from a self-centered moral perspective. An enlightened self-interest will recognize that every nation which shakes off the globalist agitators and is content to have its own culture within its own borders, is one nation that the globalists are not stirring up to invade the West.

Euphoric Anger wrote:As you'll recognize, the 1488'ers dont really talk shit to the liters; we have valid criticisms, but we dont talk shit.

... Having run in Alt-White circles for the past year or so, this is definitely not as true as I would like.

Especially concerning this blog and blogger, who some of the more mindless trolls regularly pick fights with for some reason.

The dichotomy was originally intended as some sort of vague taxonomy, which some construed as an attempt to steal the label or whatever. But, roughly put, Alt-West is omninationalist and believes Christianity is important, Alt-White doesn't spare much thought about non-white nations and has more of a race-as-ersatz-religion streak.

There is still plenty of overlap right now, since the two "camps" are not ideologically distinct enough, differing mainly on style and attitude; it is possible that the two will polarize away from each other.

@155Whether or not the "Alt-white" is stupid or not, your website has seen a steep fall in viewership while the Dailystormer, among other White Nationalist sites, continues to see almost exponential growth.

Had he stayed on defense after the fall of France Nazi Germany could've probably held Hitler's gains for a very long time.

The Germans thought the war with the Brits was over, and that they would necessarily sue for peace Any Day Now after Dunkirk. They didn't even have a plan for the prosecution of further hostilities for another six weeks.

Shirer thought, based on what generals and politicians said after the war, if the Germans had refrained from invading the Soviet Union and instead concentrated on British assets in the Med and North Africa they would have prevailed eventually.

The Germans push the Japanese to attack Vladivostok, which will be decisive, since Stalin loses his safe manufacturing areas

What? This has zero connection to the reality of 1941.

Dude, just for a start, look at a map of the USSR. See where Vladivostok is, and then locate the Donbass & the Urals. If you know the history, you know what I'm pointing to.

This isn't even alternate history. It's more like LARPing.

My map has Vladivostok near Japan. Where is it on your map?

You're missing the big picture. The entire Soviet war effort was tailored to stopping the Germans in the west. They had literally nothing left to defend the East. They could not have failed to defend the East from the Japanese, and they could not shift forces from the West.

By "attack Vladivostok" I don't mean shell it from the sea and go home. I mean attack it as the opening step of an invasion of the Soviet Union from Korea and Northern China.

Poland refused to negotiate about returning the millions of ethnic Germans living within its borders after England signed the war guarantee, which in result was rushed through because Chamberlain was embarassed about Munich by his fellow conservatives. The war guarantee made Poland feel unjustifiably safe in retrospect and felt safe to cease all negotiations. Pretty much all of the West agreed Germany had the right to demand the millions of Germans, who wanted to be part of Germany, back.

Norway and Denmark were hastily occupied after Germany got news that Churchill was planning to occupy Norway himself. The Netherlands and Belgium (which Churchill had plans of to occupy in WW2 and even WW1) were occupied both to gain a strategic advantage over France and prevent landings and occupation by the allies.

The fact you claim Hitler declaring war on America was some rash move that otherwise would've kept America out of the war convinces me adequately that you don't really have any in depth understanding of WW2 beyond your average bloke that maybe watched one or two documentaries.

Dad really liked this periscope and he said the radio (as he calls it) keeps him going, he used to say over the years in home school; Uncle Adolf made a complex to obvious series of mistakes. He would compare me to the guy and say, "well he just wanted to be an artist and was rejected from art school so that is what happened as he laughed, half joking."

(Keep in mind mom, whom had a way with words, named a dog and cat Nappy and Hitler. I had to endure mom calling out to me, Hitler, Linda, Nappy, "its dinnertime." Forgive me, missing my parents.)

@167 Rob LoblawMy map has Vladivostok near Japan. Where is it on your map?

You state an attack on Vladivostok would be "decisive, since Stalin loses his safe manufacturing areas".

How many tank factories were located in the Soviet Far East, near Vladivostok? Well, let's see:

https://infogalactic.com/info/List_of_Soviet_tank_factories

None. The furthest east Soviet tanks were being made? The Ural mountains. How far is it from Vladivostok to the actual safe manufacturing areas in the Urals, dude?

The Kirov tank factory in Leningrad and six other industrial plants were dismantled, loaded on trains, rolled to Chelyabinsk and then added on to the existing factory there, which led to the name of Tankograd.

Total production 1941 - 1945? 18,000 tanks. That is not a typo. Eighteen-THOUSAND tanks from one massive plant.

You're missing the big picture. The entire Soviet war effort was tailored to stopping the Germans in the west.

Sure, because the Soviets had already beaten the Japanese in 1939 at Khalkhin Gol using BT - 5 and BT - 7 tanks. Some unknown general named Zhukov was in charge. STAVKA knew that the Japanese could be halted.

They had literally nothing left to defend the East. They could not have failed to defend the East from the Japanese, and they could not shift forces from the West.

So what? The Japanese could in theory have rolled up the Trans Siberian Railway all the way to Baikal and it would have not made any substantial dent in Soviet warmaking capabilities. Because all the factories, and much of the raw materials, were way far away from Vladivostok.

By "attack Vladivostok" I don't mean shell it from the sea and go home. I mean attack it as the opening step of an invasion of the Soviet Union from Korea and Northern China.

And again, so what? There were no factories there. Nothing critical to the war existed in the Soviet Far East.

This is something the Russians were very worried about.

This is bullshit. You are wrong.

The Soviets knew in September 1941 that the Japanese Empire had no intention of attacking them. They knew it because Richard Sorge told them so.

And yes, the Soviets benefited from espionage into both the American and German nuclear programs before them. However, espionage by a totalitarian government is always going to be superior by one from a democratic republic.

Same reason why China is so successful at stealing American military secrets today as well as hacking major companies.

Would you and others expand upon this? I saw a lot of stuff stolen from Aberdeen, the Chinese were basically given a super computer to use and they and the big, big, hard drives disappeared.....in the early 1990's. Then Klinton gave submarine plans, warhead plans and guidance and control plans (G&C for ICBM's), for campaign contributions and just plain cash.... I would like Vox to start a thread on just this spying and what we know was stolen, and by whom and on whose watch it was on.

Another organisational blunder worth mentioning, is his choice of management structure. As I understand it, the various deparment heads, or Gauleiter, did not have rigidly defined areas of authority; nor were they constrained to operate under a system of authority by strict hierarchical delegation. In other words, it was a free-for-all. Different department heads would fight over competing, and sometimes contradictory, use of resources, in other words, they would be working at cross purposes. Goering was one of the worst offenders of this.

Hitler fostered this anarchic, competitive model, because as long as the Gauleiter were fighting with each other for power and resources, they were never able to unite politically against him.

I could easily say the same thing about America attacking Germany. Look at the US 70 years later. They are going to be conquered without a shot fired. At least the Germans fought. There is no way they "won" that war.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blogPlease do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.